Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-118 (2026)
Proving inadequacy of consent
✓ current as of May 2026
In a health care liability action, the plaintiff shall prove by evidence as required by § 29-26-115(b) that the defendant did not supply appropriate information to the patient in obtaining informed consent (to the procedure out of which plaintiff's claim allegedly arose) in accordance with the recognized standard of acceptable professional practice in the profession and in the specialty, if any, that the defendant practices in the community in which the defendant practices and in similar communities.
Acts 1975, ch. 299, § 17; 1976, ch. 759, § 18; T.C.A., § 23-3417; Acts 2012 , ch. 798, § 10.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2025 · leading case: Cardwell v. Bechtol, 724 S.W.2d 739 (Tenn. 1987).
Cardwell v. Bechtol, 724 S.W.2d 739 (Tenn. 1987). “The burden of proof on the issue of standard of care is controlled by T.C.A. § 29-26-118 of the Medical Malpractice Act.”
Bryant v. HCA Health Servs. of No. Tennessee, Inc., 15 S.W.3d 804 (Tenn. 2000). “We hold that Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118 does not require a hospital to obtain the informed consent of a patient.”
Blanchard v. Kellum, 975 S.W.2d 522 (Tenn. 1998). “; Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118. These determinations require expert testimony and are outside the common knowledge of a lay witness.”
Ike J. White III v. David a. Beeks, M.d, 469 S.W.3d 517 (Tenn. 2015). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-118 (2000 & Supp.”
Hawk v. Chattanooga Orthopaedic Grp., P.C., 45 S.W.3d 24 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). “The pertinent statute is T.C.A. § 29-26-118: In a malpractice action, the plaintiff shall prove by evidence as required by § 29-26-115(b) that the defendant did not supply appropriate information to the patient in obtaining his informed consent (to the procedure out of which…”
Miller Ex Rel. Miller v. Dacus, 231 S.W.3d 903 (Tenn. 2007). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118. The “appropriate information” that must be disclosed depends on the “usual and customary advice given to patients to procure consent in similar situations.”
Shadrick v. Coker, 963 S.W.2d 726 (Tenn. 1998). “The burden of proof on the standard of care element is controlled by Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118, which requires that in a lack of informed consent action the plaintiff prove, by expert testimony, "that the defendant did not supply appropriate information to the patient in…”
Church v. Perales, 39 S.W.3d 149 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). “See Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118 (1980). Accordingly, patients seeking damages for lack of informed consent must prove that the physician’s conduct fell below the applicable standard of care and that reasonably prudent persons in the patient’s position would not have consented to…”
Harris v. Buckspan, 984 S.W.2d 944 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998). “; Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118. These determinations require expert testimony and are outside the common knowledge of a lay witness.”
Ashe v. Radiation Oncology Assocs., 9 S.W.3d 119 (Tenn. 1999). “ANALYSIS The burden of proof on the standard of care element in medical malpractice informed consent cases is controlled by Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118. Pursuant to § 29-26-118, a plaintiff must prove by expert testimony that the defendant did not supply appropriate information…”
Pamela Moses v. Jayanta K. Dirghangi, MD, 430 S.W.3d 371 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013). “Specifically, informed consent actions are governed by Tennessee Code Annotated Section 29-26-118, which provides: In a health care liability action, the plaintiff shall prove by evidence as required by § 29-26-115(b) that the defendant did not supply appropriate information to…”
Mitchell v. Kayem, 54 S.W.3d 775 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). “…if any, that the defendant practices in the community in which the defendant practices and in similar communities. Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-26-118 (2000).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.